Let's Get Honest! Absolutely Uncommon Analysis of Family & Conciliation Courts' Operations, Practices, & History

Identify the Entities, Find the Funding, Talk Sense!

Georgia Center of OPPORTUNITY (for whom?) in re: Exploiting 1996 PRWORA (Personal Responsibility and Work OPPORTUNITY Reconciliation Act) HHS grants streams. [Publ. May 29, 2016, updated a few times since, incl. Mar. 2022]

with one comment

This post is:

Georgia Center of OPPORTUNITY (for whom?) in re: Exploiting 1996 PRWORA (Personal Responsibility and Work OPPORTUNITY Reconciliation Act) HHS grants streams. [Publ. May 29, 2016, updated a few times since, incl. Mar. 2022]. (short-link ends “-3vB”)

2022 Format Updates  About 10,900 words unless I for some crazy reason decide to excise that whole section on Opus Dei (Brad Wilcox, Rev. C. John McCloskey, III and his gubernatorial and other civil servant converts, on Michigan’s “Defending Our Father’s House” (against divorce and such other attacks on the family), and about the multi-billion-dollar Knights Of Columbus involvement, near the bottom.

Why now? I was looking to edit (fix color scheme, basic stuff) for a nearby older post which came up in blog search on (FVPSA, that is DVRN, etc. also published Spring, 2016.  For WordPress if you don’t search by title keywords you should choose Month & Year to get to it (on Admin Dashboard).  I’d remembered “May” for what was “March,” saw this and decided to at least change the background color and probably default font on this one to possibly publicize On Twitter as at least making its points.  Not a bad point to keep raising year after year…  WHY are these HMRF (explained below if new to you) grants still operational?  For the positive outcomes they produce?

Like most of my posts, it covers more organizations (and perhaps drill-downs on them, showing a few Forms 990) than any single post title could name…//YoursTruly, LGH 15March2022

~ ~ ~

Did you read my last post?  Got Feedback or Questions?

A much more detailed Feedback Form available at an 11/24/2013 post, however it comes with a rant. Either one, feedback is emailed to me. I may not reply, but will read.

Related post:   Despite Truly Funky Tax Returns, HHS Remains Loyal (2010-2015) to One Faith-Based (under Two Diff’t EIN#s, ONE of which the IRS acknowledges#) in Stone Mountain–or is it Conyers?– Georgia.  Also, Page (see rightsidebar, “Vital Links”) on HMRF funds in Georgia and recent “Note to Readers” post notifying about the page, and containing more related information.



I have been exploring certain networks and explaining the elements of them.  I look up not only grants, grantees, or organizations, but also for where and how these connect or are networked with others.

I also know, generally speaking, the average readership — not including those entities I’ve been reporting on, which can sometimes be seen on the blog —  has not voiced or demonstrated an understanding of the basic networked elements by type, and what business models (macro) are at work here.  Talking across the chasm of understanding and definitely at cross-currents to the typical agenda requires a lot of repetition, defining terms, and pointing out what the background-story may be on a better “translation according to usage” of some of the typical jargon, which will help recognizing it as jargon when it’s encountered.

Perhaps remember this phrase: “The Power of Networking is [that it gives] the Appearance of Consensus“(I just made it up)… (& clarified meaning within the “[ ]” six years later, in 2022..//LGH)

Looking at the network may show just how much overlap between seemingly multiple different entities of different types, especially when academia gets in there, the temptation may be to just give up and think, “I disagree — but I’m such a minority!!”  As my blogging, I hope, shows, most people thinking this, or over-whelmed by the same rhetoric coming at them from so many angles — and IF you engage in receiving social services, you will encounter its influence, whether or not its acknowledged — actually are NOT “the minority.”  In fact, the majority of population was not consulted in advance about the wisdom of these programs.

Congress (which, it’s fair to say, does represent a major power structure) authorized PRWORA once and continued re-authorizing subsequent versions of it, periodically. Not one version of it ever removed the HMRF funding, and there was little debate on this, in part, because of just how many people in the know agreed NOT to publicize it outside of their own circles and where marketing.

Did you ever hear, in the years between 2000 and now [originally, May, 2016], any major women’s rights or feminist organization engaging in ongoing, serious debate on their websites about these HMRF grants streams?

[Adding images to summarize “HMRF” yet again, during 2022 update.  This image page (at HHS) I see was dated December, 2020… so the grants referenced as “now” means 2020, not 2016..]

(Retroactive insert for my May 29, 2016 post “Georgia Opportunity” PRWORA {shortlink ends “-3vB”). Found at ACF.HHS.gov/OFA/programs/.., HHS page says “last updated Dec. 17, 2020.”

Two more images added during 2022 update, from the same link.  Read the text!

Typical, the basic description above mentions the male gender, “children” and “families” as plural (un-gendered) nouns.  Were all these children produced by clones?  Then what happened to the corresponding word representing those who gave birth to them, commonly known as “mothers”?

That’s not-so-subtle denigration by just removing ALL nouns referring to anyone female.  Entire FAMILIES are meant here (with minor children, of course) but when it comes to “mothers and fathers” the latter word is acknowledged, and the former is not.  That is a good part of the propaganda campaign these funds sponsor (disseminating these values), yet where are the feminist organizations, or domestic violence organizations protesting the sheer audacity of such funding streams?  To answer in part:  “on the same faucets..”  I’ve known since about 2011, 2012 (Futures Without Violence got bulked up and beefed up with such money, also enabling a re-branding from the more specific (but still NOT referencing, in its literal legal business name, ANYthing to do with women… as you can see by “Family Violence Prevention Fund.”  Now, it’s just named after a utopia, not just one but several “violence-free futures”  we should have begun to taste by now, but aren’t…

Perhaps the word “Futures” in “Futures without Violence, Inc.” was instead referencing the financial sector, trading term, i.e., “futures.” (Investopedia, terms, ‘Futures” short article from 2021).  [[Just kidding…back to my 2016 narrative now//LGH…]]

I recently reviewed “Legal Momentum,” formerly “NOW Legal Defense and Education Fund” on its’ “Welfare Reform” pages:  Not a word about these grants.  Take a look under their “Programs” (a well-developed menu), heading “Temporary Assistance for Needy Families”).  It is informative, but not one (!!) reference to either HMRF funding, or Access and Visitation as a factor why mothers are losing custody of their children to fathers (and being driven into poverty) as a result of Welfare Reform’s successful policy intent to do just that, exactly.

TANF: A Social Safety Net for Women and Families

TANF stands for Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, the federal name for the national assistance program for needy families with children. TANF is often referred to as “welfare.” The majority of families assisted by TANF are families headed by a single mother.

In support of our mission to ensure economic and personal security for all women and girls, Legal Momentum advocates for TANF improvements. Currently, benefits are insufficient, work requirements fail to account for childcare needs, and barriers prevent many of those who are eligible from receiving desperately-needed assistance.

TANF is administered by the states under the supervision of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). TANF was enacted in 1996 to replace Aid to Families with Dependent Children. The federal TANF statute and regulations are available at http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/ofa/programs/tanf/laws-regulations.

TANF is a program name under Title IV-A.  “PRWORA” is the 1996 name for the Act of Congress.  In other years, The Social Security Act (major revision/re-authorization(?) called “PRWORA”) got different names (“Deficit Reduction Act” “ARRA” (American Reinvestment and Recovery Act — after 2008 recession, this was passed in 2009) “Claims Resolution”) — each specific to a year.  But “TANF” remained the program name and TANF (“Temporary Aid to Needy Families”) still means block grants to states to administer welfare. Legal Momentum goes on to remind us of this and characterize it:

TANF substituted a fixed block grant for AFDC’s open-ended funding. Under TANF, the enrollment rate has declined from 79% to 40% of eligible families and from about 75% to about 25% of the number of poor families; benefit levels in every state have fallen to less than half of the poverty standard; real federal funding has decreased almost 30%; the share of program funds used for basic assistance has shrunk from over 70% to around 30%; the program has responded slowly and weakly or not at all to recession and economic downturn; and arbitrary interstate and regional disparities persist.

– See more at: https://www.legalmomentum.org/temporary-assistance-needy-families#sthash.wVrbl3V2.dpuf

Probably true, from the pie charts ACF.HHS.GOV makes available (I show one below for Georgia) on just which states even spent most of their TANF & MOE (“Maintenance Of Effort, that is the State’s separate contributions) on “Basic Assistance” which I have to think means Food Stamps and Cash Aid to the actual needy families.

Legal Momentum’s page above, seems to be dated 2012, but certainly, surely, the authors and their staff knew something about situations like this (quote and link, further below – maybe not the best source — but it’s dated 2000 and from Vermont website):

Vermont Legislative Research Shop

[link now broken but see Vermont.edu; Vermont University].**

Innovations in Welfare Reform

The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act (PRWORA) of 1996 changed welfare from a federal entitlement program to a state run assistance program. The states have been awarded control over welfare policy and design through a block grant. The four underlying principles of welfare reform are; … …

Under the PRWORA annual bonuses are awarded to states that have most successfully reduced the proportion out of wedlock pregnancies to total births without increasing the abortion rate. The Department of Health and Human Services awarded $100 million in bonuses to California, the District of Columbia, Michigan, Alabama and Massachusetts (each state will receive 20 million) for achieving the nations largest decreases between 1994 and 1997.

**Broken Link First Aid:  At Vermont.edu, search string “vermont legislative research service vlrs doc welfare reform” for several results.  The one dated Nov. 23, 2020 (despite this post’s date) seems to be the one I was quoting in 2016, above: a short pdf, but other results show more.//LGH 3/15/2022).

So, what did the states do with those bonuses — did they go to more basic assistance for poor families, that is poor HOUSEHOLDs, or PEOPLE?

Or, under this, are “the states” being subjected to behavioral modification techniques by the Federal Government (competitions, performance incentives, bonuses) for reducing the population (while the churches, as it turns out, are being rewarded for import[ing?] and settling more immigrants and signing them up for welfare)(separate post, sorry) (but, that answer is also YES).

Are they the ONLY bonuses available?  NO.  Increasing noncustodial parenting (translation:  Daddy-contact per week)  time = more incentives.

Are the states being treated like good little boys and girls /Children in a Classroom by their Sugar Daddy//Santa Claus the alleged moral and ethical center of our country, main assembly halls in Washington, D.C., a.k.a. the Federal Government? 

And are these “Teachers’ Pet” states, (meaning, still government entities, right?) being financially rewarded by Their Elementary Classroom SchoolTeacher”** the Federal Government, [here, the care of the Department of HHS] for heating up, multiplying and increasing their behavioral modification control tactics [such as– running HMRF and Abstinence Programming] intended to alter the sex, reproductive, and marriage habits of their puberty-through-menopause-aged (at least for women, older for men?) population so as to have fewer children outside “wedlock.”

What do you think? ________

[**Apparently the State Governments, even though they have their own associations — NCSL, NCSC, NGA, not to mention the NCJFCJ —  aren’t fully adult yet, so I have to assume “It’s-(an)-ElementarySchool teacher who is in charge of the national class.]

Welfare Reform (first authorization in 1996 labeled “PRWORA” (look it up, no shortage of input is out there) is a major behavioral-modification experiment on the United States (and territories) of America targeting its entire populations, for which we pay (℅income tax and other receipts collected at the federal level). //LGH, para. added 3/15/2022

Does SOME of this behavioral control involve, when women (single mothers) ask for BASIC ASSISTANCE, requiring that they assign, for the most part, their rights over to the Local Child Support Agency, which then goes after the absent Daddy, and, using a variety of methods, some of the encouraged and supported by the Access and Visitation grants which support:  mediation, Parent Counseling, Parent Education, Supervised Visitation PROGRAMS, administered under Title IV-D, OCSE (Office of Child Support Enforcement) annual grants delivered to ONE state-level government agency only, per year, per state, to sub-grant or administer?

Yes it does.

Could this, in effect, literally INCREASE single-mother-household poverty where before there were stable, single-parent households networked within their communities to help each other=? Does “pro forma” single-mother scapegoating built into TANF (Title IV-A) purposes blend with, through (Title IV-D) grants, sponsoring ONE side of a custody war, potentially forcing some mothers to seek legal help, lose work time, start being more harassed by their exes, not to mention having child support arrearages reduced, making them unenforceable, and in SOME situations, if Mom protests, ordering her into supervised visitation, and charging it for, breaking a few hearts, not just pocketbooks or professions along the way?

Except for the supervised visitation (as to our case), I’ll raise my hand for that one — YES.

Our version of “ordering Mom into supervised visitation to regain contact with children the father had just stolen (later, through crossing state border, “kidnapped”) was simply “no contact for you will be enforced no matter what… and this, after rebuilding from a battering-drenched and abusive marriage, failed to even protect MY right to work — where was it in this context?  What institution, primarily, seems to have facilitated that?  The family courts… //(further explanation/this para. added during March, 2022 update/formatting//LGH)

So, as to Legal Momentum above, and regarding

TANF: A Social Safety Net for Women and Families (Link still good, 3/15/2022)

…there is a complaint that the federal faucet is not flowing forcefully enough to the poor. Appears to be true, I can’t disagree.

So SINCE that is a concern of Legal Momentum, THEN WHY would it not take a look at some of the programming siphoning off some of the flow to some of the more gender-biased programs around, such as ones going to universities, nonprofits, and and a host of nonprofits with the word “fathers” in their name, or “fatherhood” not to mention others in the same grants stream that don’t seem to be targeting single-mothers for the takedown, at FIRST glance?

What about the ones that go to “Government Offices of Faith-based Initiatives” with heavy overlap to proselytizing marriage, abstinence, and how bad feminism is?

What about telling us about the “Oklahoma Marriage Initiative” and “National Healthy Marriage Resource Centers” or some of the similar activity sponsored by HHS?

Just asking.  I don’t have an answer.  To me, if the water pressure in the hose isn’t large enough — and the hose isn’t being sprayed primarily on thirsty poor people, would it not make sense to look at where there might be some leaks, or some diversions?

AT ANY RATE — it does seem that the Federal Government is playing SchoolTeacher to the States, who are its good, or bad, depending on their behavior, Children.  Or —and this may be a lot closer to the reality in the entire scenario — what we are looking at might be better described as the “Good Ol’ BOYS” network.   Speaking of Georgia … for this post.

[[Resuming my concept introduced further above

The Power of Networking is [that it gives] the Appearance of Consensus“]]:

WHAT may SEEM like a majority, just might be appearances.  The population is the MAJORITY supplier of the Federal REVENUES  and RECEIPTS for the BUDGET, but understanding BUDGET /DEFICIT talk as a distraction from total government entity revenues- generating assets held, I understand that taxpayer revenues are NOT the largest source of total revenues available to our federal, or any other level of government.

My wording there is a bit awkward, but I had since 2012 known that the Comprehensive Annual Financial Reports — which government entities must file annually — show that (I’d say it now” “A Budget is not a Balance Sheet”) (My Front Page on blog probably emphasizes this). Knowing many people’s resistance to scrolling through (let alone reading) even strategic parts (Table of Contents, Front Matter, actual financial statements (Revs & Expenses & Assets to Liabilities, and at least “Note 1” accompanying the same — for states, these can be a few hundred pages long, or smaller units, still dozens of pages long) — I’m giving easier “out” to see the concept, but in the private corporate realm: The Parts of Tax Returns USA (IRS Forms 990)…//LGH 3/15/2022 updates]

One way to understand the difference between assets (liabilities and fund balances) as something that applies to governments is to pick a 501(c)3 form 990 and look at its page 1 part 1 summary.  

The bottom line, literally, of any Form-990 used to represent to the organization’s bottom line, that is, net fund balances.  It is quite possible, in fact not even uncommon in some larger organizations to see revenues minus expenses for the year or even the prior year to be significantly below zero.

… even with a deficit, i.e.,  net assets larger than most of us would have available, a healthy positive.

To better understand any single organization then go look at the supporting details.  Part VIII is statement of revenues which shows Line 1 grants, Line 2 program service revenues which in a for-profit business would be called earnings I suppose. Line 1 Grants distinguishes between government non-government contributions Federal campaigns AND from “related organizations,” which brings up the point that any can be one of a cluster tax exempt taxable corporations or taxable Partnerships under similar control all of them with their own balance statements and cash flow.

Beyond this, the website (and posted IRS Form 990. whether there or from the IRS database) for any such organization you are looking at might be actually one of several related organizations or businesses.  You would not know this without looking at the returns and financial statements.

Knowing this is it really such a stretch to understand similar principles and government entities only for some at a MUCH larger scale.

One clue is the word “revenues.”.  Nonprofits and government entities have “revenues.”  Individual persons meaning citizens have what is called income as in is “the income tax.”. Individuals who do not have major outside income-producing assets and ways to write off expenses or hold accumulated wealth in tax-exempt organizations, will be working for and subject to those who do.

Reducing and avoiding taxation while retaining personal assets and reducing taxes on income from those assets has been the name of the game since 1913.  Control moves towards and AMONG the tax-exempt sector whether government or non-profit or public/private Partnerships.  It is in the best interest of the public-private Partnerships that those in on them do not really understand this and any Services provided or funds donated as genuinely altruistic.  The word philanthropy  is BIG, BIG business, and it is well to maintain and expand this status quo.

All good to keep in mind when dealing with movements to study eradicate poverty which divert actually help (basic assistance) to poor people into behavioral modification population control tactics run at a profit and run at public expense.  Doing this requires a substantial propaganda machine, in depends on massive ignorance or simple inability to track the money flowing through the different sectors on the part of the public.

The actual minority — but a well-funded . , savvy, persistent, and often well-positioned and well-networked minority — are those promoting certain times of HHS-sponsored (at least) jargon).  Remember, this can include simultaneously fathers-rights and “family-violence-prevention [“Engaging Men and Boys” etc.] .  Compared to the entire population of the United States … this is an expanding infrastructure, and it’s been expanding for now three decades (1980s – 2010 at least) but I do not believe saturation point is reached yet.   Viewer fatigue and confusion, maybe, but saturation?  No.


[Continuing to Explain/Define Vocabulary relating to the Family Courts and their part in a larger macro-patterns within the USA and globally, i.e., outsourcing government services by “expertise” then coordinating practices by subject-matter experts as a tactic to undermining political jurisdictions…]

This typically will take more than one post, and a lot of “deliverables” on any individual post.  It is going to take some time, each time, to show parts, then connections.  That’s one reason my posts tend to have substantial “introductions,” explaining where organization XYZ may function in a network, or as a part of the overall connected-enterprise accomplishing, coordinating with other elements, a desired goal.

In this post, I talk about the religious influence — because it’s a factor — but remember, any time I am talking about any religion, denomination, or primary controlling entity of any religion (Catholic, or any variety, including “the garden variety” of Protestant, or any other) in the USA, I am still referencing its position on the tax-exempt scale, which is also going to affect its loyalties, allegiances, and of course, bottom line, assets available.  Assets available, and revenues ALSO includes available to sponsor media campaigns, lobbying, and attempting to line up a nation’s policy with a religion’s particular beliefs. So, bringing this up, regardless of who it offends, is still “fair game.”

We are talking use of public dollars in social policy set by US Government, and when religion gets involved pushing buttons, I have every right to point out how it’s done and that it’s done.  As I’ve made it clear before, I am a woman, and as to marriage, the alleged beliefs were Christian, and in our case, this included wife-battering, which is how and why I became, just in time, instead of another “headline” or more years as a battered wife and mother, in front of our growing daughters, in one of the most liberal areas in the US (San Francisco Bay Area, not to mention, home of mega-nonprofit “Futures without Violence” which takes credit for having helped get the Violence Against Women Act passed the first time, in 1994), now for even more years another scapegoated demographic profile, a single mother.


The Context, and some of the Key Content, of this post:

Georgia Center of Opportunity” as a topic ties into my recent page & post on HMRF grants in Georgia, and one recipient, “More Than Conquerors, Inc.”  When I posted additionally on “Funky Tax Returns, HHS remains loyal…” as to “More Than Conquerors, Inc.,” I believe I also publicized that one of the executive directors had also been running an organization “Connected 2 You” which appeared as one of many logos showing up as “marriage initiatives” under THIS organization’s (Georgia Center of Opportunity) banner.  As I recall.

I had already deduced from the MTCIGA.org tax returns that SOMEONE was running curricula because of the outside expenditures under “Other Expenses” on this HHS grants-getting organization.  That hunch appears to have been correct, and Viola January appears to have been the contact person for a curriculum named  in association with this other Georgia organization (Now called “Georgia Center of Opportunity”).

The “Promote Family Values” (as religiously defined) business model appears to be:

Form nonprofit, nonprofit gets the grants, nonprofit runs the programming and paying others to do this becomes nonprofit expenses:  Either “Salaries” if employees, orwhen it’s not employees running the program, Pt. I, “Other Expenses.”  Details then, of those “other expenses” either show in Part VIIB as “Independent Subcontractors” (for current version of Form 990) if they were over $100K, and/OR on Part IX Statement of Expenses, Under Lines 11a,b,c,d,e,f,g, which deal with fees for services, non-employees.   When any figure on “Line 11g (I think it is, representing “Other”) is more than 10% of total expenses, that should be explained in an Attachment “O.”  Said explanation for MTCIGA.org as I recall, was heavily outsized for total expenses, and of that amount the outsized line-item was under Health/Relationships (workers) — over $100K, and more than once.  

If a key person involved in the nonprofit (such as a Director or Officer) is being paid indirectly, or running an entity which then is contracted to provide services, that should be listed as an “Interested Person” on their tax return.

I discovered, through writing this post and wondering whether my original hunch was correct, that the “Georgia Center of Opportunity” formerly dba “Georgia Family Council” name change of entity October, 2015 from “Georgia Research and Education Family Council,” is indeed closely aligned at least in leadership, if not organizationally, the the “Focus on the Family” [keyword, James Dobson print/media empire, conservative message, tendency to have predominantly male boards of directors, and a reputation for followers being “weak” on confronting domestic violence] network of state-level 501©4 + 501©3 combinations lobbying state-level government against certain political positions, i.e., abortion, same-sex marriage, AND at several points opposed to no-fault divorce itself, and intent on changing the nation’s laws to accommodate this opposition.  Follow-up posts explain more fully.

I found a close association with a well-known Catholic, ah, “personal prelature of the Pope,” or “Cult” depending on one’s point of view, to these Georgia 501©3 activities in particular through the person of Bradley Wilcox — and that is Opus Dei.

In addition, an overt declaration, “call to arms” about the attack on life, marriage, and family represented by no-fault divorce (allegedly) has been launched on a website called “Defending our Fathers’ House.”  Some Opus Dei converts and/or priests (Rev. C. John McCloskey III, article below) shown were making headlines in the 2012 Presidential Elections (see “Rick Santorum” for starters).  The pro-Opus Dei publication writing about Rev. McCloskey’s unusual “vow of poverty + converting the rich and powerful to Catholicism,” which is not really news for someone who gets NYT articles on the situation (i.e., he’s famous), was put out by an on-line which admits its publishing partner is “The Knights of Columbus.”  The Knights of Columbus, when we are talking about fiscal clout, has many organization (I looked them up previously in a similar, but not identical context); we are talking one organization with $20 BILLION in assets, and specifically (like the order) male-only members, and a related “Charities” organization (by far not the only one), a “mere” $73 MILLION.

“We are not amused” at Focus on the Family’s intent to portray themselves as solidly Protestant, and exploiting access to Protestant Churches to help support and run the curricula, while I personally have been exposed to enough negative publicity and name-calling of Catholic, for their beliefs, practices, and doctrines among certain types of Protestant churches, while collaborating closely with Roman Catholics, particularly Opus Dei mentality, when it comes to the role of women in the church, in marriage, and anywhere else.   As it turns out, a “focus in the Family” Policy Council in Minnesota called for help from the Mormons (both money and volunteers) when it came to trying to get a marriage clause into the Minnesota Constitution ca. 2012, as had been done by a major public relations firm previously in 2008.

Apparently, when it comes to matters of DOCTRINE, the religious differentiate and compete for customers, but if ANY of them is facing imminent uprising by, say married (or divorced) women and mothers in their ranks, then they know how to present a solid flank in opposition for valuing physical safety of adult women of or beyond reproductive age over the institution of marriage — as conceived by them.

In following up on this single lead (Georgia Center of Opportunity), and although I’ve known about some of the information for years, I am starting to wonder how much the marriage movement itself — HMRF grants, the whole deal — may be MOST heavily influenced with the weight of Catholicism, obviously financially and historically “the big kid on the block” compared to any religions which date to no earlier than, say “the Reformation” that is, let’s ballpark it at around 1500 A.D.

I know other religions (Judaism, Islam, new age types) are also somewhat involved in the programming, as well as the Unification Church, as well as obviously those who may not overtly or even at all openly identify with a major religion but certainly must appreciate the perks for social science-related professions in having so many people (welfare populations, church-referrals, etc.) on which to test their theories and get paid for it, too.


Georgia Center for Opportunity incorporated in this state in 1990 and is active and in compliance.  Its registered agent name is spelled in such a way as to make it hard to ‘search’, but that’s the least of my concerns about this organization and what it represents for the majority of Americans.  And I say that knowing that the majority of Americans (USA citizens I mean, and I mean per the Census Bureau) are women.

Business Name Control Number Business Type Principal Office Address Registered Agent Name Status
GEORGIA CENTER FOR OPPORTUNITY, INC. K014704 Domestic Nonprofit Corporation 333 Research Court, Suite 210, NORCROSS, GA, 30092, USA eric.cochling Active/Compliance

Former Name shows that the name change, at least officially, is under one year old:

Filing Number Old Name New Name Created Date

And the Filing History shows it filed in 1990, apparently* didn’t submit annual reports in 1991, 1992 and in 1993 was Administratively Dissolved.  It apparently* continued not submitting such reports for 1994 and 1995, and finally got itself reinstated only just in time for 1996 Welfare Reform.**… It then continued not submitting reports for 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001 and apparently was Administratively Dissolved again in Nov. 2002.  No big deal apparently — it again did not submit for 2003, but got itself reinstated at the tail end of 2004, and from then on has behaved better.

And this from an organization connected with individuals and philosophies which essentially say, to the rest of the world (particularly wives, mothers, and women) “SUBMIT!”

From which the rest of SOME of the world derives an in-depth and in-your-face understanding of the word “hypocrite” (see also words of Jesus Christ regarding some of the religious of his own times, if the gospels are to be believed anyhow).   Not that this particular brand of conservative public policy promotion based on Below-the-Bible-Belt religion (amped up by Catholicism in general, and certain brands of it in particular) has any particular monopoly on hypocrisy.  It’s probably part of “the human condition.”

But, unlike some who may wish to admit this, others have decided they are fit to dominate others, in the name of (their) Father, specifically.  To attack this status quo is to attack “Our Fathers House” and the call is already out to defend it.

(*all secretary of state databases usually have some disclaimer language with them. See fine print at the bottom to realize this is provided by PPC Technology Corp.)

Although between 1993 and 1996, Welfare Reform (PRWORA as it became signed into law AUGUST 1996) was a big topic those days, and undoubtedly for this organization, it didn’t get RE-INSTATED until June, 1996.  Not exactly a good starting track record for compliance with rules and regulations.  Unless, at that time Georgia didn’t require

Filing Number Filing Date Time Effective
Filing Type
01119684 8/2/1990 12:00:00 AM Business Formation
02226799 7/1/1993 12:00:00 AM Administrative Dissolution
11472346 6/5/1996 12:00:00 AM Reinstatement
03018609 11/9/2002 12:00:00 AM Administrative Dissolution
03304949 12/13/2004 12:00:00 AM Reinstatement
04304176 12/20/2004 12:00:00 AM Annual Registration(2004)
04700461 3/9/2005 12:00:00 AM Annual Registration(2005)
05684815 3/15/2006 12:00:00 AM Annual Registration(2006)
05857432 3/12/2007 11:04:22 AM Annual Registration(2007)
06653365 3/19/2008 10:45:35 AM Annual Registration(2008)
07519571 2/24/2009 11:47:09 AM Annual Registration(2009)
07334983 3/18/2010 12:25:32 PM Annual Registration(2010)
08762735 5/18/2011 12:13:44 PM Annual Registration(2011)
09540313 4/20/2012 3:56:42 PM Annual Registration(2012)
08881016 2/12/2013 4:22:04 PM Annual Registration(2013)
10968023 4/2/2013 6:09:29 PM Name Change
10690322 3/25/2014 12:04:58 PM Annual Registration(2014)
11255915 3/26/2015 3:58:48 PM Annual Registration(2015)
12559516 1/29/2016 4:23:23 PM 1/29/2016 Annual Registration(2016)
  • Page 1 of 1, records 1 to 19 of 19


PRWORA — From a 2000 piece at the University of Vermont, called

Vermont Legislative Research Shop

Innovations in Welfare Reform

The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act (PRWORA) of 1996 changed welfare from a federal entitlement program to a state run assistance program. The states have been awarded control over welfare policy and design through a block grant. The four underlying principles of welfare reform are;

  • Cumulative lifetime and employment time limits
  • Increased child support enforcement

  • Reduction in teenage pregnancy

  • Creation of work programs and supportive services (Camissa 1998, p.72)

The decentralization of control has allowed states to develop innovative welfare programs under the augments of the four principles stated above.

Innovations serving Children and Youth: . . . . .

From the same source:

Under the PRWORA annual bonuses are awarded to states that have most successfully reduced the proportion out of wedlock pregnancies to total births without increasing the abortion rate. The Department of Health and Human Services awarded $100 million in bonuses to California, the District of Columbia, Michigan, Alabama and Massachusetts (each state will receive 20 million) for achieving the nations largest decreases between 1994 and 1997.

Obviously this is about a breeding and population control initiative, while increasing retention of saving from for almost anyone BUT the individuals who are being scapegoated for the nation’s economic woes, and — as to single mothers in particular — for its social ills, too.

However, the rewards don’t go to those wonderful, dare I say, “women” (some maybe already mothers) who successfully do NOT engage in out of wedlock pregnancies, or abortions, but DO, as adults (or, as young women) say NO not just to the above, but ALSO say “NO” to abuse within marriage?  Nor do they go to any offspring they may already have raised, successfully, in the form of tax reductions from wages, or to the population overall, who is being continually hit on for contributions to this particular source of federal wealth and income-producing assets (as ANY investing platform retained over time typically is, and usually can be).

What a radical idea — reduce taxes when it turns out that “welfare” money isn’t actually being used for welfare, but for private profits, pockets, and purposes.

Georgia Center of Opportunity is a 501©3, formerly “Georgia Family Council” formerly “Georgia Research and Education Family Council,” a privately-funded group (tax returns say formed in 1990; other sources say date of ruling, 1982) which takes credit for having organized 12 marriage advocacy organizations in the state of Georgia.

This gets real interesting because it seems like one of them crossed paths with me while I was looking up some lil’ ol’ abstinence grants recently, and encountered one I hadn’t seen before.  In the context of speaking about FBOs “faith-based organizations” one with part of a Bible verse built into its name and taking quite a bit of HHS funding since 2006, seemed fair enough.   I had just recently also revisited an entity (actually, multiple entities) out of (North) Miami, Florida, which is advertising the social services it provides under the theme “Peacemakers®”, corresponding to several for-profit, not-for-profit, still active and/or InActive (including administratively dissolved for non-filing) — while HHS opted to grant NOT to the multiple 501©3s controlled by the reigning, married, co-pastor couple with their varying (depending on the 501©3 style) street addresses, while the organization as a whole is almost obsessively promoting marriage, fatherhood, and of course outside that, abstinence — but to the church itself.

All the while, and advertising this also, as functioning under government privilege (as churches have with the IRS).  The church also, being a corporation has the pastor as its registered agent and since I first began reporting on this has, it seems added campuses in Harlem, NY and somehow in San Diego, California under the same brand.  Speaking of branding, the co-pastor (wife), it says, has a few decades of experience in broadcast media.  They are also partnering periodically with “CDF” (Children’s Defense Fund) Freedom schools.  See “Early Morning Intuitive on the Larger Picture (#2 of 3) post, a recent one, for details.


I had a sense, once I located this particular Georgia Center of Opportunity organization, that it might be somewhat related to the well known State-wide “Family Councils” network promoted by a certain (very) famous and influential (and very conservative) organization in the US.  As sometimes happens, looks like I was right.

IRONICALLY, Georgia shows up as one of several states that spend less than 25% of their TANF and MOE (Maintenance of Effort) money — $508 million in 2014 says the next pie chart — on “Basic Assistance.”  (Gray = less than 25% spent on basic assistance, on the US map below).

TANF and MOE Spending on Basic Assistance, Work-Related Activities, and Child Care, FY 2014 | Office of Family Assistance | Administration for Children and Families

MAYBE, just MAYBE this has SOMETHING to do with the deep poverty within the state in some circles which seem to get targeted for TANF-based (that’s the source of the program funding under OFA for “HMRF” grants) abstinence and marriage promotion.  ==>

In fact the pie chart image (found at HHS) says that in 2014 they spent only about 8.4% on BASIC ASSISTANCE.  Somehow, over 70% was spent on non-basic assistance, and of the 2.3% which appears to represent a certain purpose for this money, looks like SOME people knew how to “go for it.”…

Which brings us to the question, why are those in power always pointing the finger and preaching about the morals of the low-income and anyone on the government dole through welfare, while the system itself is doing nothing but encouraging endless expansion — beyond original purposes, whether it comes to the HHS/OCSE (Office of Child Support Enforcement), and eliminating practically (through making it simply too dangerous to choose) what they COULD not get passed legislatively — and that is to legislatively declare ourselves if not a COnservative Christian (ideally Catholic, if not also Jesuit) United States of America, second-best choice, at least establish the values held by the same (and held, incidentally, in common with the Unification Church in the family values regards….), at least a declared patriarchy and oligarchy.  Where religion fails to persuade and convince, social science & the family court policies may succeed.

GEORGIA TANF&MOE Spending&Transfers by Activity(8.4% only on %22Basic Assistance%22 71.5% on %22Other Non-Assistance%22), FY 2014 $508,895,729 Total Funds (1p)

I have to talk about this outfit in Georgia, and about its connection to a well-known, and contested (is it a cult?  Or just helping inculcate a devout Catholic spirituality into daily life for the laity?  Or, is it, as at least some sources are saying, an outgrowth of fascism and tyranny, as typical of Mussolini (Italy), Franco (Spain, where Opus Dei’s founder hails from) and Hitler (Germany).

Whether or not it is any of the above, when you have fake coronations (Year 2004, honoree Rev. Sun Myung Moon and his wife, the “true Parents” and according to the former, the second Messiah because Jesus (by failing to marry and propagate his kind) didn’t finish the job) with Congressional attendees — in the Dirksen Building of the U.S. Senate — as I have blogged, is not at debate as to having happened or not, and plenty of others have also reported) — AND you have prominent already conservative legislators being converted to Catholicism, if not also Opus Dei by a known adherent (Father McCloskey, Samuel Brownback, Rick Santorum’s son, Newt Gingrich, AND you have in addition such things as I found on a Michigan-based (?) website with a call to action called “Defending Our Father’s House” and the attempt to get rid of: No-fault divorce, and start criminalizing those who start divorce with penalties, while rewarding the “Responsible” (i.e. “Fit”) parent with automatic 1/3rd custody time — I think we had better take this seriously.

Networks are what they are — NETWORKS.  Religious institutions ,in this country, are organized in a certain way that encourages their social function by both tax exemption and now even more it would seem, soliciting their partnership with government (and AGAINST whom???) in taking federal family-values-based funding sold to the public under the guise of reducing poverty, and improving the public health.  To some of these, Welfare Reform didn’t go far enough.

NOT on the table for discussion among the stakeholders is how misbehaving, out of control, rapidly proliferating and IRresponsible nonprofit formation by tax-exempt churches (and others, but in this instance we are talking, primarily churches) might be contributing to the overall poverty of those NOT engaging in such behavior.  Where, among those coaching every one else, is the admission that while mobilizing to correct the marital ills of the nation for economic reason, and overcome the impediments of civil law which does not privilege (their) religion enough, they are not monitoring their own when it comes to IRS compliance?

Just another FBO:  Georgia Center of Opportunity, with leadership connected to:  

Institute for American Values (David Blankenhorn), Institute for Marriage Policy and Practice (Maggie Gallagher, Bush-Administration paid journalist to promote this theme), and, [not] co-incidentally, with Senior Advisor Opus Dei faithful, Brad Wilcox

Backed also by the Friedman Foundation for Educational Choice (as in Milton Friedman, “The Chicago School”).

New York Times, about one year ago (June 12, 2015) on a well-known Opus Dei Priest who has a rather unusual ministry:

While from the NYT, I found it posted at “Crux” which acknowledges being published in partnership with the Knights of Columbus, and organization I looked into (its tax returns included), and was aware of as it’s active in many Catholic dioceses, parishes, churches.  It’s also a male-only membership organization, specialty, insurance benefits of the members.  Wives and children receive benefits through association with the men-only who may become members.  And it’s VERY wealthy:

Search results for “Knights of Columbus” have many results, often named after geography. I sorted by Assets, these are the top two by assets.  Notice, one is $20B, the other,$73M.  The filings of course will show where revenues coming from and expenses are going to.

Search Again

KNIGHTS OF COLUMBUS CT 2013 990O 143 $20,541,656,462.00 06-0416470
KNIGHTS OF COLUMBUS CT 2012 990O 45 $19,408,071,360.00 06-0416470
Knights of Columbus CT 2011 990O 95 $18,032,382,246.00 06-0416470
Knights of Columbus Charities USA, Inc. CT 2014 990 86 $73,765,774.00 41-2140273
Knights of Columbus Charities USA, Inc. CT 2013 990 57 $72,306,045.00 41-2140273
Knights of Columbus Charities USA, Inc. CT 2012 990 51 $69,670,801.00 41-2140273

About Crux: Taking the Catholic Pulse

Welcome to Crux! We’re an independent Catholic news site, operated in partnership with the Knights of Columbus. We hope you’ll find the site lively, engaging, topical, and thoughtful.

Crux strives to cover the worldwide institution of the Catholic Church, from the papacy to the hierarchy to local dioceses. We’ll explore the theology, doctrine, liturgy, practices, and traditions of Catholicism in the context of the life of modern-day Catholics, giving full voice to disagreements and challenges facing the Church and Catholics.

The Rev. C. John McCloskey III in 2002. (New York Times Photo/Stephen Crowley). From 6/12/2015 NYT article by Mark Oppenheimer.

Last fall, I traveled to Palo Alto, California, to meet the man with the unusual gift.

Some priests are known for their work among the poor, others for their learning, still others for decades of service to a parish. The Rev. C. John McCloskey III, a priest of the traditionalist Opus Dei order, has a different calling. He makes converts, often of the rich and Republican.

He has personally prepared for conversion to Catholicism, among others, Gov. Sam Brownback of Kansas; the Supreme Court nominee Robert H. Bork; the columnists Robert D. Novak and Lawrence Kudlow; the conservative publisher Alfred S. Regnery; the anti-abortion activist Bernard Nathanson; and Lewis E. Lehrman, an investment banker and former candidate for governor of New York.

McCloskey, 61, is hardly the only conservative priest or minister. But few have his knack for persuading political conservatives to adopt a different religion.

After military school, Columbia University, and a stint at Merrill Lynch, he joined Opus Dei and became a chaplain at Princeton University. He then ran the Catholic Information Center, an outreach ministry near the White House, where he introduced many Washington insiders to Catholicism. At his silent retreats in Virginia, Capitol Hill and K Street types see one another and nod.

When we think political influence, we think big money: the Koch brothers or Sheldon Adelson. McCloskey has taken a vow of poverty, but he has another kind of influence. He has helped shape the spirituality and the thinking of powerful people who have similar views about the market and social issues. Many of his converts know one another; it is a kind of club. As Pope Francis is breathing life into the Catholic left, McCloskey is defibrillating the Catholic right. …

In Palo Alto, where Opus Dei sent him in 2013 after a period in Chicago, McCloskey and I shared a late-afternoon cocktail. He talked about his college years, his time on Wall Street, and his calling to become a priest. …

Brownback and Lehrman did not respond to requests for comment. Nor did the presidential candidate Rick Santorum, whose son was baptized by McCloskey. But Regnery, whose family firm has published William F. Buckley Jr., Ann Coulter, and Dinesh D’Souza, did respond, effusively.

In the 1990s, dissatisfied with the Episcopal Church, Regnery attended two weekend retreats run by McCloskey. They became friends, and in 2006 or 2007, he became a Catholic.

McCloskey knows that many men “don’t have any friends but their wife,” Regnery said.


I would like to look up a little bit more regarding “Georgia Family Council” and some of the officers of the other groups referenced above (i.e., MTCIGA.org and Committed 2 You Inc.) particularly because (see below) one of the individuals features prominently on the TAGGS.HHS.gov grants list as a principal investigator; however at the moment a message says Georgia’s Business Entity Search site is undergoing temporary maintenance.


Another course of info on 501©3s and other profits is “CitzenAudit.org” == it is possible to find more than 3 years of results on many organizations.  Searching that site for the EN# associated with (Georgia Family Council, now called “Georgia Center of Opportunity”) I did find some of its private finders — and that a ruling date of 1982 (not 1990) prevailed.  I also saw from its Year “2010” (Fiscal Year 2009) tax return that the address did match the “Center for Community Initiative” logo address, above (i.e., 3500 Parkway Lane #460, Norcross, Georgia).

The Program Service Accomplishments page this year put the “CCI” as top listed activity, #4a:

[IRS form prompts] Describe the exempt purpose achievements for each of the organization’s three largest program services by expenses Section 501(c)(3) and 501(c)(4) organizations and section 4947(a)(1) trusts are required to report the amount of grants and allocations to others, the total expenses, and revenue, if any, for each program service reported

4a (Code ) (Expenses $ 433,060 including grants of $ 1,200 ) (Revenue $ 17,506 )

Center for Community Initiatives (CCI) IS working to strengthen healthy families at the local level The Center has He|ped create 12 local marriage and family initiatives (CM FIs) across Georgia that encourage better relationships, better marriages and better families Connected leaders from all sectors of a local community and helped them craft |ong range plans for strengthening families in their community and provided professional assistance with board development, fundraising and communications He|d dozens of trainings that have certified almost 900 Georgians in various marriage and relationship courses who have used what they learned to touch more than 3,700 people in their community

4b (Code ) (Expenses $ 348,699 including grants of $ 0 ) (Revenue $ 0 )

Center for Policy Studies (CPS) influences public policy by helping leaders and citizens understand the government’s proper role in contributing to human flourishing and strong families The Center Pub|ishes studies and commentaries on issues important to families to influence opinion leaders in the state Works with lawmakers to pass legislation that that benefits Georgians Provides public policy expertise to government leaders, the media and the public on numerous issues including education, marriage and family, child wellbeing and more

4c (Code ) (Expenses $345,949 including grants of $0) (Revenue $ 0)

Center for an Educated Georgia (CEG) works to ensure that all students in the state have access to a quality education by promoting meaningful education reform and school choice The Center has Recruited nearly 200 grassroots activists who are sharing the benefits of school choice with lawmakers and the public all across Georgia He|ped get Georgia’s school choice options like the Tax Credit Scholarship and the Special Needs Scholarship approved by the legislature and continues to promote the programs, which are benefitting thousands of families Organized the largest school choice rally ever in Georgia, which drew more than 1,100 people to the state Capitol

4d Other program services (Describe in Schedule 0 ) See also Additional Data for Description
(Expenses $ 104,535 including grants of$ )(Revenue$ )

Total program service expensesh-$ 1,243,243

The $17K revenues is probably from training people in the curricula.  From their website (currently, and that site changed from “GeorgiaFAMILY.org” to “GeorgiaOPPORTUNITY.org”

Among several “Initiatives”


Georgia suffers fiscally and socially because of high rates of divorce and childbearing to single mothers. Financial and social problems often arise from fragile families and communities. GCO’s Family and Community Initiative seeks to understand the driving force behind Georgia’s fractured family structure and develop solutions to strengthen this cornerstone of opportunityRead more about our Family and Community initiative.


1 in 13 Georgians are under some form of state supervision, and two thirds of people released from prison are rearrested within three years. High rate of imprisonment and recidivism causes instability within homes, negatively impacting children’s intellectual, social and emotional development. GCO’s Prisoner Reentry Initiative focuses on removing barriers for ex-offenders to successfully rejoin their communities by obtaining employment and connecting with their familiesRead more about our Prisoner Reentry initiative.

If you read some of these previous posts, or Red Herring Alert’s references to them, or ANYTHING about the HMRF grants in general over time, does it not seem rather like a close match between this organization’s “Initiatives” and the available HHS grants for the same goals?

Notice the blaming of single mothers, who apparently should be coached to stay married, and if/when their men are in prison, make sure to re-connect with the ex-cons in positive co-parenting ways…Apart from that, look at the curricula they are running:

“HEALTHY FAMILIES INITIATIVE” (from GeorgiaOpportunity.org), described:

(continuing what they do):

  • Providing relationship education to adolescents and young adults to prepare them for healthy relationships
  • Working with local churches and other religious organizations to educate and mentor young adults and couples
  • Improving vocational education and apprenticeship opportunities that afford adolescents and young adults a sense of purpose, a route to employment, and greater marriageability
  • Working with state leaders to reduce or eliminate marriage penalties associated with state welfare policies

The program will (not in place yet???)  take place in the Norcross and Peachtree Corners area, but the goal is to create positive results that can be easily replicated in different communities in Georgia and across the country. This is a solution-focused, community-based program that will build on GCO’s ongoing work to encourage family formation and strengthen marriages here in Norcross and around the state.

Click here to download class descriptions (Image below, right, but <==click link for better clarity) 

I recognize two of them:  PREP, and “Boot Camp for New Dads.”  Notice — NO information offered (such as a link to the curriculum providers’ websites, or much description about it at all), just “contact us….”  Why not provide some helpful information about the programs for website viewers (including the public who, frankly, helped pay to develop them, and disseminate them via HHS anyhow….)?  They are along with this, of course, pushing

Georgia Center for Oppty (formerly GFC, EIN# 58-1928520) %22Healthy Families Classes%22 (4)

Per Citizen Audit’s “Funders and Grantees” tab on this organization.  The first is located in Indianapolis, the second (the Community Foundation) is the largest as far as assets (typical of major community foundations), and the Alliance for School Choice is in Washington, D.C.

Funders and grantees

A powerful feature based on exclusive research by CitizenAudit. Funders don’t appear on an organization’s 990 form, so the list of who funds this group comes from the funding organizations’ own respective disclosure forms. You must cite CitizenAudit if you use this information in published research.

Funders: The Friedman Foundation For Educational Choice Inc , Community Foundation Of The Chattahoochee Valley Inc , Cobb Community Foundation Inc , Alliance For School Choice Inc

More Website info — I see “Brad Wilcox” is among those listed.  (Search the net to find out more about him.  Incidentally, it seems he’s also Opus Dei)… From this website:

Bradley Wilcox, Associate Professor of Sociology at UVA (note: Bio doesn’t list his marriage/family status. There’s a reason why…. Religious affiliation)

Senior Advisor, Healthy Families Initiative (At the Georgia 501©3)

W. Bradford Wilcox is Director of the National Marriage Project at the University of Virginia, Associate Professor of Sociology at the University of Virginia, Visiting Scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, and a Senior Fellow at the Institute for Family Studies. [##See Footnote below]

As an undergraduate, Wilcox was a Jefferson Scholar at the University of Virginia (’92) and later earned his Ph.D. from Princeton University. Prior to coming to the University of Virginia, he held research fellowships at Princeton University, Yale University, and the Brookings Institution.

##Institute for Family Studies
P.O. Box 7967
Charlottesville, VA 22906

[Per PO Box Search and USBIZS.net, this PO Box belongs to an accounting firm? Cooley & Associates, PLC.  In “Albemarle” County, VA.


[Per Guidestar, at the same PO Box is EIN#270950140, The Ridge Foundation, Inc.” (Ruling 2010, Mission:  “To provide current research on the current state of marriage and the family in America and around the globe”  Programs:  “Marriage and Family Reports” NTEE Classification:   B90 = Educational Services and Schools – “other.”).  This link provides a snapshot of YE2014 and 2015 returns showing it’s abjectly dependent on contributions (no government grants) and spending more than it’s taking in, Contributions being around $461K one of those years.

ALSO at the same address (apparently accountant? Gregory J. Cooley is helping faith-based organizations), per IRS Tax-Exemption Ruling Letter June 2009 (effective date 2008),”Interfaith Humanitarian Sanctum, Inc., ” or EIN# 263985605


PO Box 7967, Charlottesville, VA — Faith, Family — and Hooters”?

I guess this can happen if one is an accountant, but (ironically) — and this is just another PO Box search result — when “Cornett Hospitality, LLC” filed a VOLUNTARY Chapter 11 bankruptcy (looks like in Nov. 2012), per “RichmondBizSense.co”  Cooley and Associates, owed $183K in trade debt, shows up in the top 20 creditors (several others of which include government entities, as well as “The Bank of Virginia.”).  Ironically, the 13 other dbas by which Cornett Hospitality did business, themselves  were “Happy Owl of ____ dba Hooters of ____” in their names (!):

All Other Names used by Debtor in the last 8 years:

Topeka’s of Parham, LLC, d/b/a Topeka’s of Parham
Topeka’s of Chesterfield, LLC, d/b/a Topeka’s Swift Creek
Topeka’s of Charlottesville, LLC, d/b/a Topeka’s of Charlottesville
Max & Erma’s of Short Pump, LLC, d/b/a Max & Erma’s John Rolfe Commons Max & Erma’s of Glenside, LLC, d/b/a Max & Erma’s Glenside & Broad
Happy Owl of Richmond, LLC, d/b/a Hooters of Richmond
Happy Owl of Chesterfield, LLC, d/b/a Hooters of Midlothian
Happy Owl of Chester, LLC, d/b/a Hooters of Chester
Happy Owl of Roanoke, LLC, d/b/a Hooters of Roanoke
Happy Owl of Beckley, LLC, d/b/a Hooters of Beckley, WV
Happy Owl of Wilkins, LLC, d/b/a Hooters of Monroeville
Happy Owl of Harrisburg, LLC, d/b/a Hooters of Mechanicsburg
Happy Owl of Wyomissing, LLC, d/b/a Hooters of Wyomissing
Happy Owl of York, LLC, d/b/a Hooters of York, PA


Yes, the Institute at Princeton I believe was called the Witherspoon Institute, showing the Opus Dei connection.  Besides which, “DOFH” (Defending Our Fathers’ House), a website (if not identified 501©3) in Michigan has his signature on an impassioned letter to the Pope, signed by many, on the defense of marriage.  Here’s the logo:  The blog published a VERY long letter from Pope John Paul II declaring 1994 The Year of the Family

Why this matters:  Opus Dei is a call (some say, a cult) to Catholic laity and a personal prelature to the Pope.   Here, is an appeal from DOFH to rescue marriage from the attack it is under by (civil law, etc.) — look at the signatures at the bottom:

A Covenant Call 


To Defend Her Children & The Divine Plan On behalf of our children who have no voice and who suffer the most, may we ask our Church to elevate the sacrament and living expression of our faith, marriage, to share in our Church’s defense of human life and the Divine Plan? For forty years, America has been ruled under civil law and judgments that remove state protection of rights to life and of marriage according to our contracted religious promises. ###

No doubt, our culture is devolving, our civil liberties vanishing, and our lives more at stake than we ever could have imagined in our beloved America, land of the free, home of the brave.  The ever-accelerating pace of the attack on life, liberty and the practice of faith has brought us to the precipice of martyrdom where we may soon face suffering much like what our sisters and brothers in Christ endured up until the fourth century. . . .

There is NO question from this document that the “forty years” (besides paralleling the famous “40 years” in the wilderness) refers to since 1970 “No-Fault Divorce.”  Probably this was written in 2010 then?   Continuing this “Covenant Call” we can also see the intention that ecclesiastical law should prevail when and where it comes into conflict with civil law….

Outlined is a proposed Catholic strategy to establish an institutional line of defense within our church, the larger faith community, and the public square for safeguarding and defending the Divine Plan by the way we structure our lives and lead by living example. We pray the Holy Spirit inspires a Marian ‘Yes’ from the spouse of Christ to sow these seeds, to water and till the garden, to ask our Father for the increase of a civilization of love.

We ask that this Covenant Call may be shared throughout our Church and the ecumenical community of faith with an invitation to join together to restore our reverence for the Divine Plan and the integrity of marriage in our houses of worship and in the public square. . . . . .

Leadership & Community Marriage Policy

VI.Spur the Laity to Lead Community Marriage Policy® Drives in Each Diocese . . .  (etc.)

We Catholics are best situated to serve and defend the Divine Plan by implementing the Community Marriage Policy as a standard in every diocese and every community, including those without Catholics

Ecumenical & Stakeholder Marriage Coalition

VII.Catholic Clergy and Laity Form a Marriage Leadership Coalition Across Faiths, Denominations and Stakeholder Groups:

This faith coalition would pool legal, financial, academic and organizational resources (e.g. academic and economic institutions, child, family and marriage advocacy and law groups, business institutions, etc.) to:

. . . . . iv. That marriage lawfully contracted under a body of ecclesial law must be safeguarded from abridgment or undermining by civil law; under the US Constitution, Article 1 Section 10 and the 1st, 5th, 7th, 9th & 14th Amendments should hold particular authority for marriage contracted under ecclesial canons;

v. That spouses who fulfill their spousal vows and promises, including obligations as fit parents to offspring, serve the common good and should be recognized as ‘responsible spouses:’  ///

  1. That laws and policies aiming to reduce poverty and domestic violence, collect child support, or achieve other purposes in the community should pass a scrutiny standard that ensures they do not decrease marriage, increase divorce, cohabitation or non-wed births, or undermine the sovereignty of fit parents and parent-child relationships.

Cohabitation is certainly not illegal in the US.  However, it is to be discouraged, according to this letter.    Notice that reducing even domestic violence should be scrutinized to make sure it doesn’t “increase divorce.”   As a formerly battered, and by the grace of God NOT murdered in the family home spouse (mother) involved in a so-called “Christian” marriage, I take issue with prioritizing marriage over avoiding this kind of harm (including and up to physical injury and/or death, and or other forms of ongoing devastation that go along with the (wife-beating and terrorizing, essentially)!!

This next paragraph makes it clear the intent is also to do away with “No-Fault Divorce.”  Gee, I wonder if the “responsible spouse” guidelines have anything to do with why the HHS grants stream is titled RESPONSIBLE Fatherhood….

  1. Request the Uniform Law Commissionthe legislative drafting agency of the American Bar Association (http://www.nccusl.org), craft a model law [i][ii] within a specific, expedited time frame to correct the systemic injustices and profound harm to children, spouses, the institution of marriage, the practice of faith, the Constitution, the rule of law and the common good that No Fault Divorce law imposes across the nation. The model legal framework undergirding No Fault Divorce law has had four decades of accumulated historical, scientific, economic, and developmental experience and evidence that substantiates vital circumstances warranting an urgent update to restore fidelity to our Constitutional requirements. Responsible Spouse Guidelines offer a sound starting point for accomplishing this while still preserving the original purpose of the statute’s design.

This is signed by a single M.D. in Michigan, however, footnote [i] shows who else supports at least that which is footnoted. I also included the contents of Footnote [iii] which, although inaccurate, shows that a least this source KNEW and was TALKING about PRWORA effects on the family.

In Jesus Christ Our Lord,


Michael T. Ross, MD

Defending Our Fathers House

This 3rd Millennium of Mercy

March 2012

[i] A published marital law model based upon Responsible Spouse Guidelines[i] has been shared with Archbishop Vigneron, Cardinal Timothy Dolan and Cardinal Raymond Burke as well as with other clergy and academicians such as Most Reverend Bishop Salvatore J. Cordileone (USCCB Subcommittee for the Promotion and Defense of Marriage), Dr. Robert P. George (McCormick Professor of Jurisprudence at Princeton University), Dr. Pat Fagan (Opus Dei, Senior MARI Researcher, Family Research Council), Dr. Brad Wilcox (Opus Dei, Director of the National Marriage Project)and Dr. William E. May, (emeritus Michael J. McGivney Professor of Moral Theology, John Paul II Institute for Studies on Marriage and Family).

[ii] Ron Grignol and Michael T. Ross, “Broken Family Law: Guidelines and Fixes,” FCS Quarterly, Summer, 2011, pages 39-43

[iii] Welfare reform in 1996, the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act (PRWORA), authored by Rick Santorum under House Speaker Newt Gingrich’s leadership, and signed by President Clinton, substituted new entitlement eligibility language, ‘non-custodial parent’ for ‘absent parent,’ the old appropriation language. This amended welfare reform assured prospective recipients, whether high-skilled workers, professionals, or former recipients that they could still conceive and care for children financially, whether they opted to forego marrying or to divorce their child-conceiving partners. This ended “welfare as we know it,” removing AFDC recipients off taxpayer-funded welfare rolls and created temporary assistance for needed families (TANF); however, this reform effectively qualified every middle class, indigent, and upper class mom in the entire child-bearing population to receive entitlement payments for conceiving a child (funded, not by tax receipts, but by child support collections taken directly from noncustodial parents’ wages). When a child’s parent becomes a non-custodial parent, the child’s other parentbecomes immediately State-eligible for entitlement payments and other benefits from that parent; federal taxpayers appear to pay much less after reform, funding only the collaborative federal/state enforcement costs through the Social Security Administration for child support collections taken directly from noncustodial parents’ wages.

Links on Opus Dei (whether supportive or not) show it is a serious commitment.  This first one, showing it is a “Personal Prelature” means, “OF THE POPE”….

First link (positive) from “ETWN” Eternal Word Television Network” in Alabama:

Fr. John Trigilio explains Opus Dei for CRNET

Opus Dei is neither a religious order, like the Dominicans, Franciscans & Jesuits, nor is it a Secular Institute or religious movement, like Cursillo or Charismatic. It is a Personal Prelature, 95% which is laity and only 5% clergy. It was founded by the late and recently beatified Blessed Jose Maria Escriva in the early thirties in Spain. Well before Vatican II taught the UNIVERSAL CALL TO HOLINESS of all the baptized, Msgr. Escriva sought to promote a spirituality for the laity. ….

He devised a spirituality of and for the laity. OPUS DEI, the Work of God, is a means by which the Catholic Faithful sanctify themselves and the world in which they live and work. It is comprised of all walks of life, doctors, lawyers, homemakers, teachers, students, bus drivers, retirees, etc. The goal is for each member of Opus Dei to bring their Roman Catholic Faith into their WHOLE life, home, work & play. As leaven in the world, the laity being IN the world bring Christ and the Catholic Faith INTO that same world by the way they practice their Faith. The clergy’s function is to HELP the laity find their spirituality and to help them bring the FAITH to the world.

Opus Dei, then, is a vehicle by which its members sanctify the world by sanctifying themselves in whatever situation and condition and vocation they find themselves. …

Rather than selling out to the social mores of the pagan culture like modern sycophants, Opus Dei members uphold the moral and doctrinal teachings of the Church and encourage all men and women of all faiths to obey the Natural Moral Law. Due to their resistance of diluting Church law, many opponents accuse Opus Dei of being anti-ecumenical.

All in all, Opus Dei is a superb method for any Catholic Christian to know their Faith more fully, to create a concrete strategy for Christianizing the world and to build up the kingdom of God via ALL members of the Church, lay and clergy.



The image below, however, is Randy Hicks.  References to him having helped create family advocacy groups in “12 states” is interesting, as well as his work for an (unnamed) California center before that.  Graduate of “Biola University” in Los Angeles.


“As a longtime student of the social effects of family breakdown, Randy works with local and national policy leaders to elevate marriage, family and community-based collaboration in our cultural and public policy discourse. He partnered with the White House to convene a roundtable on the topic of marriage-affirming community initiatives that accompanied GCO’s release of a national study on the taxpayer costs of divorce and unwed childbearing. He has served on the Community Mobilization Committee for the Marriage Commission and on the Site Selection and Program Committees for the World Congress of Families.

Here in Georgia, Randy has led GCO’s effort to help with the startup and launch of 12 community-based initiatives that work to reduce divorce and unwed childbearing at the local level. At the request of Chief Justice Leah Ward Sears, he served on the Georgia Commission on Children, Marriage and Family Law.”

(Another search result):  This typifies the company the GFC and Randy Hicks has been keeping.

Institute for American Values  | Georgia Family Council | Institute for Marriage and Public Policy | Families Northwest

David Blankenhorn

Biographies of Panelists:

David Blankenhorn is founder and president of the Institute for American Values, a nonpartisan organization devoted to strengthening families and civil society in the U.S. and the world. … USA Today in 2000 describes Blankenhorn as “leading a grass-roots movement” to strengthen marriage. A 1995 profile in the Los Angeles Times called him “the de facto navigator” of a new fatherhood movement and the Idaho Statesman describes Blankenhorn’s 1995 book, Fatherless America, as “the bible of the fatherhood movement.” In 2005, Carl Gershman of the National Endowment for Democracy called Blankenhorn’s Islam/West project “the most effective initiative to influence opinion in the Arab world since 9/11.” His most recent book, “The Future of Marriage,” was published this year.  …

In 1977, he graduated magna cum laude in social studies from Harvard, where he was president of Phillips Brooks House, the campus community service center, and the recipient of a John Knox Fellowship. In 1978, he was awarded an M.A. with distinction in comparative social history from the University of Warwick in Coventry, England.

A Harvard grad with no other advanced degrees since then?…Anyhow, next up is “Maggie Gallagher” and after that Randi Hicks, then a man Jeff Kemp (education:  Dartmouth/Pepperdine) representing, I guess, the USA Northwest, in this flyer (?) put out by AmericanValues.org (which is the Institute for American Values) and finally “Benjamin Scafidi, Principal Investigator.”

Benjamin Scafidi featured at “Friedman Foundation for Educational Choice” (in Indianapolis) (Contributor to the “Georgia Family Council” a.k.a. “Georgia Center for Opportunity” under discussion here).  As that site says, this is theMilton Friedman” famous (or in-famous depending on viewpoints) of Economic fame.


Ben Scafidi is a professor of economics and director of the Education Economics Center at Kennesaw State University. He is also a senior fellow with the Friedman Foundation for Educational Choice and the Georgia Public Policy Foundation. His research has focused on education and urban policy.

Always good to get an idea of who is the organization being cited.

Search Again

Georgia Public Policy Foundation GA 2014 990 26 $89,167.00 58-1943161
Georgia Public Policy Foundation GA 2013 990 22 $251,958.00 58-1943161
Georgia Public Policy Foundation GA 2012 990 23 $273,329.00 58-1943161

OH GOOD GRIEF, here we go again.  Separate post friends.  Can’t stick all the right-wing networkers on a single, linear, post! I just started going down that rabbit hole, again, and found myself reading about a RECENT American citizen (Sally Pipes, down from Canada) welcomed by One Embarcadero Center Suite #350, San Francisco-located “Pacific Research Institute.”

Such private non-profits that the networked tax-exempt roundations like to sponsor, whether left, OR right, do not often bring up while solving the world’s problems, what part their tax-exempt privileged status plays in the world’s problems. Or this country’s. We are not supposed to talk about the halls of power except pro or con the national debates. here, About “Obamacare.”

While they are accumulating momentum, public presence, media presence, and access to various universities through sponsorship by others wealthier than the new nonprofits getting set up, Some of us are still here, noticing how that works, and struggling with situations that none of these talking heads, apparently, think of. For example, Georgia’s Public Policy Foundation has discrepancies on its very under-stated tax return (except in the expense categories) and what’s more, has a list of Senior Fellows which is 12 men and three women, and that’s a 4:1 ratio. Only one of the three women doesn’t have a “Dr.” in front of her name — but she does have a significant conservative connection; it’s called “Heritage Foundation.” Not to mention “Mercatus Center” at Virginia’s George Mason University. When this same individual then was asked to address a leadership conference (2015) for “Benjamin Rush Institute,” and that institute had only been formed in 2013 (and, located in Northern California as a Virginia corporation), AND had similar issues overstating “salaries” to the tune of “0” employees (Georgia Public Policy Foundation acknowledged 2 employees, but recorded expenses for what appears to be about 4) — then I had to look it up.

Back to the Benjamin Scafaldi bio, above….

Previously, he served as chair of the state of Georgia’s Charter Schools Commission, the education policy advisor to Gov. Sonny Perdue, on the staff of both of Gov. Roy Barnes’ Education Reform Study Commissions, and as an expert witness for the state of Georgia in school funding litigation. He received his Ph.D. in economics from the University of Virginia and his B.A. in economics from the University of Notre Dame.

Ben and Lori Scafidi and their four children reside in Kennesaw, Georgia.

The Taxpayer Costs of Divorce and Unwed Childbearing: First-Ever Estimates for the Nation and All Fifty States

The Taxpayer Costs of Divorce and Unwed Childbearing: First-Ever Estimates for the Nation and All Fifty States

Benjamin Scafidi

Institute for American Values, 2008 – 44 pages

This study provides the first rigorous estimate of the costs to U.S. taxpayers of high rates of divorce and unmarried childbearing both at the national and state levels.

Subjects: MarriageDivorce More by: Benjamin ScafidiReadRead PDF

As it turns out (from front matter) the “HMRF” gang’s all here — I see references to Ron Haskins (Brookings Institution), Theodore Ooms (CLASP — Center for Law and Social Policy) who has been pushing fatherhood initiatives since at least the early 1990s, and others…. In 2008, the $150M/year of HHS “marriage/fatherhood” granting had already been going on for over ten years, making it by then, obviously, $1.5 Billion.  

One Response

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. Reblogged this on World Peace Forum.


    May 29, 2016 at 2:31 pm

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: